I think BobbyBlunder's advice is quite good, play openings you enjoy. However, don't get too off beat otherwise you will not have very many master games to learn from. Though there are always exceptions to the rule. I probably have looked at every offbeat system on earth. I have even played 1....b6 against an IM. End up getting an inferior version of the French.. Now I am trying to play openings where I can get a small advantage with white and have counter attacking chances as black. Seems like ICS is taking the main line approach as well. If anyone has the book Starting out 1.d4 the author there talks about how it would be a terrible mistake for an improving play to play anything but the main main lines. He was an IM and recently got beat I think by a GM playing the Colle. It would be very exciting playing all the GM lines in his book but I think I would be studying opening theory for 5 years...

I've looked into Stonewall Dutch and it seems like a solid opening. I mean Botvinnik played it! and Kramnik played it early in his career so it can't be too off-beat.

I'm thinking learning Stonewall and later Classical Dutch will be less demanding - less theory than learning Nimzo and Queens Indian. I will definitely start learning Nimzo/QID some time in the future but for now I feel that I should spend way more time on middlegame/endgame and tactics.

Looks like they've updated the opening section and looks like they made it better.

They are no longer promoting Nimzo but now they have Semi-Slav. Either one is obviously solid.

Another thing I forgot to mention about Stonewall - if the black replies e6 the game could to to to French (if White continues with e4). Seems like this happens often according to some books and since I'm studying French against e4 it would work in my favor!

The Dutch Stonewall or classical goes very well wth the French. White plays 1.d4 and you play e6. That means even less to learn because white can't play the staunton gambit and other anti-dutch lines. Though you have to be prepared for 2.e4 going ino a French. Brand new book out on the Dutch called "Win with the Stonewall Dutch" by Sverre Johnsen. He advocates the Dutch against everything even 1.Nf3, g3 or c4... Currently I play French and Kings Indian but may move over to the stonewall as well.. I like the English as white but may learn 1.d4 someday. A very good french book is how to play against e4...by Neil Mcdonald..

Chessbud wrote:The Dutch Stonewall or classical goes very well wth the French. White plays 1.d4 and you play e6. That means even less to learn because white can't play the staunton gambit and other anti-dutch lines. Though you have to be prepared for 2.e4 going ino a French. Brand new book out on the Dutch called "Win with the Stonewall Dutch" by Sverre Johnsen. He advocates the Dutch against everything even 1.Nf3, g3 or c4... Currently I play French and Kings Indian but may move over to the stonewall as well.. I like the English as white but may learn 1.d4 someday. A very good french book is how to play against e4...by Neil Mcdonald..

Chessbud,

Thanks for your thoughts. It makes me feel better that I'm on the right track. I am currently also learning French defense against e4. I have "Flexible French" by Moskalenko which is a great book. I also have older McDonald's book called "Mastering the French" which is great also. I've heard of the new McDonalds' book "how to play against e4" and maybe will get it in the future.

"Win with the Stonewall Dutch" will be out like August 31st at best Fortunately, I have stonewall book by Aagard which is pretty good!

I have a copy right now at home. Bought it a www.classicalgames.com couple of days ago. They normally get the books much earlier than amazon. Looks like a very good book. I also have aagard's book as well. Also a very good book.

Chessbud wrote:I have a copy right now at home. Bought it a www.classicalgames.com couple of days ago. They normally get the books much earlier than amazon. Looks like a very good book. I also have aagard's book as well. Also a very good book.

How is that book? Is like a database dump or does it have nice prose and explanations? Tree of analysis or complete games? Easy or more for advance players? How does the material in the book compares to ICS material?

The book looks to be very well written. I don't have it with me right now but is had maybe 65 well annotated games with plenty of explanation. It's more advance than your regular starting out book but still looks to be a very good attempt at explaining the stonewall. I like the complete games format as it helps you in all aspects of your game not just the opening. I also like to see how the opening develops into a winning endgame etc....However, for those who do not like the complete format the book also has an analytical section at the end of each chapter that shows just the moves to make. I haven't really starting the ICS material yet. I just got month 2 from them..Plan to start soon..I was preparing for the world open. Of course the book is maybe 225 pages long so you will have a very thorough explanation of the stonewall dutch. The last chapter, chapter 12 shows how to handle the stonewall dutch against 1.nf3, 1.c4 and other first moves by white. Here's a link to the classialgames site that has a PDF sample of the book...I still trying to decide if I should play the stonewall or my old favorite King's Indian. Then against e4 I am wondering if I should play French or Center Counter. I'm pretty satisfied with English as white...It has been a real master buster for me lately... Either way it seems like three good openings is all I need to learn...One for white and two as black...

Chessbud wrote:The book looks to be very well written. I don't have it with me right now but is had maybe 65 well annotated games with plenty of explanation. It's more advance than your regular starting out book but still looks to be a very good attempt at explaining the stonewall. I like the complete games format as it helps you in all aspects of your game not just the opening. I also like to see how the opening develops into a winning endgame etc....However, for those who do not like the complete format the book also has an analytical section at the end of each chapter that shows just the moves to make. I haven't really starting the ICS material yet. I just got month 2 from them..Plan to start soon..I was preparing for the world open. Of course the book is maybe 225 pages long so you will have a very thorough explanation of the stonewall dutch. The last chapter, chapter 12 shows how to handle the stonewall dutch against 1.nf3, 1.c4 and other first moves by white. Here's a link to the classialgames site that has a PDF sample of the book...I still trying to decide if I should play the stonewall or my old favorite King's Indian. Then against e4 I am wondering if I should play French or Center Counter. I'm pretty satisfied with English as white...It has been a real master buster for me lately... Either way it seems like three good openings is all I need to learn...One for white and two as black...

Thanks for the input! I will go through ICS Dutch material first, then Aagard's book with complete games then get this book.

Month 4 has good material for Center-Counter/Scandianavian Qd6. ICS material with some good annotated games will serve you well! Also, there are some good video lectures from chesslecture.com and Andrew Martin's DVD on Scandinavian Qd6. I've been studying the system for a little bit and haven't tested out yet in actual play but it seems very flexible! If Tiviakov can draw against Anand and win against Kamsky with it then it's definitely playable!

Kings Indian has so much theory I hear - no less then Sicilian! So, I'm staying away from both for a while

I'm sure you are well aware that Stonewall and French go hand in hand because you can reply e5 to d4 and your opponent can go with the French. So it could serve a double purpose!

I'm also trying to learn English. Didn't have much to study it lately. I've got my Dynamic English and "Starting Out English" and plan to go over it this Summer.

I have been thinking hard about the Stonewall. Every time I think about giving up the King’s Indian it gives me a reason to keep playing it. For example, I beat an opponent almost rated 2500 in 23 moves at a recent tournament with it. However, I have had horrible loses as well. It is a lot of theory that I don’t know but perhaps if I would take the time to learn the theory I could do a lot better. It also a universal solution to everything except e4. Stonewall is good as well, easy to play and like you said goes well with the French. Aagard’s book on the Stonewall is very good. That Dynamic English book is another project of mine. I want go through it. I currently have 12 games with the English and like what I see so far but I need to learn the line where black goes c6 early better. I'm really looking forward to the new books coming out on the English called Grandmaster Repertoire Volume 3 by Michael Marin. Here’s a link to those books. I'm hoping the English books will be based on complete games. What I like about the English is it is very deceptive. Seems like white is playing passive, but it’s that nagging persistent edge that you get. Teaches you good positional chess as well. Sounds like your are on track to get a complete and coherent opening repertoire… That’s very important.http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/sections/6/coming_soon/

And don't forget Marin's books are two books. The first book is 1.c4 e5 and the second book is 1. c4 versus everything else. The second book comes out in November I think. I am eagerly awaiting Houska's book as there is a good chance I will take back up the center counter that I played for twenty years. I played it back in 1985 and got my expert title with it and played it all the way to 2007 when I switched to the French. Back in 1985 players would come up to me and say I can't believe a player of your rating would play that Junk. Now it is a mainline opening.. I played the q-a5 line and may still play the q-a5 line. A good book for that line is the Essential Center Counter by Andrew Martin. Though q-d6 looks interesting. Keep in mind that white plays all sorts of things beside 3. N-c3 as well...Center counter is a tough nut to crack....I eagely await month 4 of ICS.

I've just received my copy of "Win with the Stonewall Dutch" and the book looks fantastic!

I was studying from Aagaard's book for the last 2 week and most of the games are not really well annotated. I wish the plans would be explained better. Now, this new books seems more basic and explanations are great!

On the issue of opening theory and which system to choose. For White the standard advice is to play main lines and try to secure some safe advantage by reaching a position where the initiative is in play or it has been transformed in to something more permanent. Small but permanent.

For black the choice boils down to - do you want to try to neutralize white's initiative or counter-attack? The general advice is , whatever your preference, make it mainstream. You need to have confidence in your opening systems and they need to teach you something about chess middlegames and strategy.

The issue of theory is sort of irrelevent at U2300 what counts is understanding. Even many of the big theoretical positions in practice at the U2300 level will not be won by rehearsed moves. Chances are your non-booked opponent will deviate long before the key positions are reached. What matters is your feel for the position that does arise. If you understand the position you will find a good plan. Particularly if you complete ICS and have a good grasp of chess logic!

Unless you are a professional most of your opponents are not willing to sit down and work on the systems in the way that is needed. So in practice if you do that, then you will do well.

For example lets have a look at the Kings Indian. Strategically rich opening. If you want to counter-attack, this fits the bill. Too much theory? Not really. There are only so many pawn structures and typical plans. Make sure you know the CSQ of the move orders and you are good to go. Frankly The subtleties are not that significant U2300 and you don't need to know them. A good way of circumventing theory here is to play a line in a mainstream opening that is OK but just not fashionable. For example your opponent plays the main line classical Kings Indian with a view to playing the very popular Bayonet attack (9 b4)

Your choices are 6...Ndb7 or 6...Na6 instead of Nc6 or even 6...Bg4. If you do play the main line instead of playing Nf6 when the Knight is on h5 drop it on f4. This line is fine but just not fashionable.

So this part is key if you want to reduce your workload but follow the advice to play 'proper' openings: Avoid fashionable lines in mainstream openings, don't avoid mainstream openings but make sure you are clear on whether you prefer to counter-attack or dampen down white's initiative. If you are the latter don't play the King's Indian or Dutch. You will be better off with the QGD Tartakower or something. Some systems are good at being solid while not ruling out the play for a win - hence the popularity of the Nimzoindian and the Slav.

Me? I'm a King's Indian kind of guy. Against e4 I play the Sveshnikov. Too much theory? Not really the Sveshnikov has only a few pawn structures and you learn to appreciate piece play compensating for shattered pawn structures. In practice though hardly anyone ever plays the Open Sicilian so you end up playing against Bb5, c3, Nc3 and f4.

In summary, if you learn to play mainstream openings your opponent will often toss away their advantage to avoid the main lines. Job done!

I agree it is funny how at the lower levels you never get games that go more than a few moves of theory anyway. Plus at my level of just having played for a year none of my opponents play main lines.

So far I've played 51 games and despite being a 1....e5 player that whole time I've never once faced the Ruy Lopez proper, only the exchange variation a couple of times and mostly variations on the Italian game and Ponziani, with maybe a single Kings Gambit and Viena Game.

It's funny when playing against 1.d4 though most people do play the mainline Queens Gambit (at least for a few moves until they run out of knowledge) rather than go in for the Colle, Torre, London, Trompowsky etc.

In my limited time playing chess, I've looked at some replies to e4. Mainly, Caro-Cann, French, and Ruy Lopez. I haven't studied any one of them in detail but they haven't sat down with me too well. I just felt uncomfortable! As a d4 player, when I stared to play Caro-Cann and French I was completely lost Obviously, at the end of ICS course, with better positional understanding this might change completely!

Now, Stonewall Dutch feel pretty nice! Positional system that you can definitely play a bit more aggressive if you want to.

The other important thing for me is the selection of the study material and opening that doesn't require LOTs of theory and study time like Sicilian, Kings Indian, or even French! This new book "Win with the Stonewall Dutch" is excellent! It really explains things nicely, lays out the plans and has very nice annotated games!

I compare all opening books to Houska's "Play the Caro-Cann". This book actually measures up!

The bottom line is obviously that openings don't matter all that much for lower rated players and it doesn't matter what opening I play. I don't win or lose games because of openings. But, if I understand ideas in specific the opening I'm ready for anything!

I think I will stick to this opening for a while. In addition to ICS material, I have Aagaard's Dutch book with lots of good games so I have my work cut out for me.

I will ignore Semi-Slav material that ICS started to offer for now because I would rather concentrate on one system.

I'm going to take up the Stonewall Dutch shortly now. I've decided to become a fully commited ICS devotee now and play all their opening reportoires starting with 1.d4 then looking at the Dutch and Scandanavian, playing them for a year and after that starting to learn the richer openings, the French, Kalashnikov and Sicilian.

I'll even take up 1.e4 I think in 12 months or so just to shake up my chess.

I had a browse through the book above at the bookstore at the British Champs this afternoon and it does indeed look to be well put together.

The Stonewall Dutch is just fine! You will probably find some top GM's willing to tell you that is incorrect in some way. For example Korchnoi believes that the Kings Indian is not correct while Fischer said the same thing about Korchnoi's French ... and so it goes on. The Stonewall Dutch teaches you about chess - it is a good counter-attacking opening (1... f5 is not an initiative neutralizing system). Caro-Kann obviously has a fine pedigree.

The volume of theory you want to get involved in has a relationship with your expectations regarding the initiative. I understand that not all us can spend hours every night pouring over every nuance in every variation.If you want to limit your opening study - that is understandable. In practice this means as white you will probably have to accept more or less equal positions and as black, white will have a slight advantage of some kind.

At our level that is fine. If you feel good about the positions you play and understand them well, then you will be successful. Frankly at 1800 or something += is not much different to = or =+. You might not want to give Kramnik a += but Mr Smith (1600) from Anytown is going to blow all that with his very next move!